Sgt. 1st Class Robert Nicoson, of Blackhorse Troop, 1st Squadron, 73rd Cavalry Regiment, was charged in early April with two counts of failure to obey a lawful order, two counts of reckless endangerment, one count of communicating threats and three counts of obstructing justice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The charges stem from a roughly 10-minute gunfight that erupted at a pro-Syrian regime checkpoint<\/a> Aug. 17, 2020. The exchange reportedly <\/a>killed one Syrian fighter and wounded two others. There were no U.S. casualties. A portion of the gunfight was caught on video, though it does not show how it began.<\/p>\n\n\n\n After \u201creceiving safe passage from pro-regime forces,\u201d the Americans \u201ccame under small arms fire from individuals in the vicinity of the checkpoint\u201d and returned fire in self-defense, Operation Inherent Resolve officials said in a statement at the time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Eight months later, OIR spokesman Col. Wayne Marotto declined to comment on an investigation into the incident. The U.S.-led coalition \u201ccannot comment on any allegations that are under investigation or the subject of current or pending court-martial charges,\u201d he told Army Times.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The charges against Nicoson allege that he put soldiers into a situation they shouldn\u2019t have been in and made threats against the pro-Syrian regime forces at the checkpoint before the gunfight started, according to Nicoson\u2019s civilian defense attorney, Phillip Stackhouse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cSoldiers were told to stay two kilometers away from particular Syrian forces, but the missions that [Nicoson] was a part of, presumably took them within two kilometers of those same Syrian forces,\u201d Stackhouse said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n There was also a platoon commander leading the patrol, Stackhouse added, but that soldier only received a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand following the incident.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cHis platoon commander was there. In fact his platoon commander was in one of the more lead vehicles and [Nicoson\u2019s] vehicle was the trail vehicle,\u201d Stackhouse said. \u201cThe platoon commander is not charged, so why are they charging Nicoson?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n A spokesman for the 82nd Airborne Division, Lt. Col. Mike Burns, confirmed that only Nicoson is facing charges but declined to comment on the platoon leader\u2019s situation. Burns also declined to provide charge sheets and added that the allegations are not limited to one incident.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But the checkpoint gunfight is at the \u201ccrux of the allegations,\u201d said Stackhouse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The clash occurred in an area where a cluster of tribal villages remain loyal to Russian-backed Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, according to Nicholas Heras, a senior analyst at Washington\u2019s Newlines Institute for Strategy and Policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThat pocket of regime control has existed since the start of the Syrian civil war, and the U.S. forces would have been well aware of it,\u201d Heras said. \u201cIt is quite possible that this was a floating checkpoint that the local regime-aligned militia decided to set up to harass the Americans at a time of tension between U.S. and Russian forces.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n When the patrol encountered the checkpoint, the platoon leader was speaking with higher headquarters while Nicoson interacted with pro-regime forces through an interpreter, according to Stackhouse. OIR officials said after the incident that the U.S. patrol was cleared to pass through before they were fired upon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As the gunfight unfolded, Nicoson and another soldier left their trucks to draw fire away from a gunner who needed to reload a crew-served weapon, according to a narrative by the non-profit group United American Patriots.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That non-profit is supporting Nicoson and has become well-known for advocating on behalf of U.S. troops accused or convicted of war crimes, including Clint Lorance<\/a> and Eddie Gallagher<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicoson isn\u2019t facing allegations that he acted inappropriately once combat started, according to Stackhouse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cBut what they are alleging is that [Nicoson] sort of prospectively threatened the forces at the checkpoint \u2014 that if they shot or attacked [the Americans] \u2026 harm would come to them,\u201d Stackhouse added. \u201cBeing there to begin with, they\u2019re saying, is reckless endangerment.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the time of the incident, OIR officials dismissed allegations circulating on social media that an airstrike was ordered on the checkpoint. However, an Apache attack helicopter did perform a show-of-force prior to the gunfight.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The obstruction charges come from allegations that Nicoson instructed soldiers to delete GoPro footage of the incident, which Nicoson\u2019s defense team disputes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Before an Army CID investigation into the incident was completed, Nicoson was being written up for a Bronze Star with valor, according to Stackhouse. The CID investigation was \u201clight\u201d on details, he said, though Army Times has not seen a copy of the document.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI don\u2019t think it\u2019s any stretch at all to say that CID and several of these military investigative agencies conduct their investigations with a significant amount of confirmation bias,\u201d said Stackhouse. \u201cWe always have to do our own investigation.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\t![\"\"](\"\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/IMG_5369.jpeg.jpg\")